<div dir="ltr">Hi Jochem,<div>I do not need to reach that far. You can do that with a "personalized" WKT string, it is easy... but probably not supported by many software.</div><div>Every combination of geographic crs and projection does not make sense in EPSG. Coordinate reference systems are usually defined by the state/country authority. In Spain for instance the oficial for maps is ETRS89 + UTM (3 zones). Nobody uses a LCC. In Switzerland they use a single projection (Hotine_Oblique_Mercator_Azimuth_Center). USA has... well, this is a different chaos; but it has a limit.</div><div><br></div><div>My problem comes with the lack of a </div><div> a) worldwide </div><div> b) accurate / well defined </div><div> c) projected system</div><div> d) in EPSG</div><div>for general purpose.</div><div>(When I say b), I would include an associated geoid, EGM2008?)</div><div><br></div><div>WGS84 / UTM does not fulfill b).</div><div>WGS84(G1762), ITRF2008, ITRF2014, and other similar do not fulfill c).</div><div>NAD83(2011) / Any projection does not fulfill a)</div><div>A personalized WKT does not fulfill d)</div><div><br></div><div>I do not need every combination. I just need "one".</div><div>Later I can convert -if needed- to my local crs in my country using (probably) an accurate transformation.</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Javier</div><div><br></div><div>PS. Dear Santa. All I want this year is a substitute for WGS84. One that we all agree, we all love, accurate and useful. One easy and accurate to transform to the personal needs. One with a nice family of projected children in EPSG that we all can enjoy and play with. Not only for my friends an me, but for everybody in the world.<br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">.___ ._ ..._ .. . ._. .___ .. __ . _. . __.. ... .... ._ .__<br>Entre dos pensamientos racionales <br>hay infinitos pensamientos irracionales.<br><br></div></div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, 18 Apr 2021 at 09:20, Lesparre, Jochem <<a href="mailto:Jochem.Lesparre@kadaster.nl">Jochem.Lesparre@kadaster.nl</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="NL" style="overflow-wrap: break-word;">
<div class="gmail-m_-2261832968946553779WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB">This is indeed a major problem with (the way most software and people are using) EPSG. By just using EPSG CRS codes, one needs a unique EPSG CRS code for every possible combination of
datum and projection. However, the number of possible combinations is way too large. I think, the solution is to split the datum definition (WGS84, WGS84G1762, ITRF2014, ETRF2000, etc.) and the projection definition (UTM, pseudomercator, LAEA, LCC, etc.).
For the datum definition one can use the normal EPSG CRS codes. For the projection definition one could use the lesser known EPSG conversion codes, e.g. EPSG conversion code 16031 (<a href="https://epsg.org/conversion_16031/UTM-zone-31N.html" target="_blank">https://epsg.org/conversion_16031/UTM-zone-31N.html</a>)
for UTM zoned 31N. Isn’t this the approach used in WKT strings?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB">Jochem
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(225,225,225);padding:3pt 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US"> PROJ <<a href="mailto:proj-bounces@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">proj-bounces@lists.osgeo.org</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Noel Zinn (cc)<br>
<b>Sent:</b> zaterdag 17 april 2021 23:59<br>
<b>To:</b> Javier Jimenez Shaw <<a href="mailto:j1@jimenezshaw.com" target="_blank">j1@jimenezshaw.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> proj <<a href="mailto:PROJ@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">PROJ@lists.osgeo.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [PROJ] World UTM in a proper datum<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">We really need two codes, don’t we? One for the geographical datum (ITRF2014 in GRS80, which is EPSG:7789 in your case) and one for the projection UTM in GRS80 (which, I guess, doesn’t exist),
perhaps an EPSG architecture problem. To be frank, your expectation that the EPSG do for ITRF2014 what it’s done for WGS84/UTM is unrealistic. Add ITRF2008 and so on, how many combinations would that be?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif;color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:whitesmoke"><b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif;color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif;color:black">
<a href="mailto:j1@jimenezshaw.com" title="j1@jimenezshaw.com" target="_blank">Javier Jimenez Shaw</a>
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:whitesmoke"><b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif;color:black">Sent:</span></b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif;color:black"> Saturday, April 17, 2021 3:56 PM<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:whitesmoke"><b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif;color:black">To:</span></b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif;color:black">
<a href="mailto:ndzinn@comcast.net" title="ndzinn@comcast.net" target="_blank">Noel Zinn (cc)</a>
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:whitesmoke"><b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif;color:black">Cc:</span></b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif;color:black">
<a href="mailto:PROJ@lists.osgeo.org" title="PROJ@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">proj</a> <u></u>
<u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:whitesmoke"><b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif;color:black">Subject:</span></b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif;color:black"> Re: [PROJ] World UTM in a proper
datum<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Hi Noel, <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">If I am the only user of the data, I can do that (and whatever I want). But if I have to produce accurate data processed by somebody else, I fall into the hole of vagueness of WGS84. For instance,
if I create a precise GeoTIFF and I want to tag it with an EPSG, using EPSG:326XX is... vague. Or a GCP, or anything else. There are several alternatives for the geographic crs.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">I know I can apply UTM over ITRF2014 (GDAL does it easily). But there is no EPSG code for that.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">.___ ._ ..._ .. . ._. .___ .. __ . _. . __.. ... .... ._ .__<br>
Entre dos pensamientos racionales <br>
hay infinitos pensamientos irracionales.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">On Sat, 17 Apr 2021 at 22:24, Noel Zinn (cc) <<a href="mailto:ndzinn@comcast.net" target="_blank">ndzinn@comcast.net</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:1pt solid rgb(204,204,204);padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Unlike an empirically-derived datum transformation (e.g. WGS <> ITRF), which can have different levels of "accuracy" depending how it was derived, a map projection (lat/lon <> N/E) is defined mathematically
and is precise, i.e. without error. Having said that, there are better and worse algorithms for UTM, but that's not the question you're asking. In a datum transformation sense UTM will always be as (and only as) "accurate" as the geographicals you convert
to N/E. So, use EPSG:326XX and EPSG327XX, but plug in your precise geographicals. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif;color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:whitesmoke"><b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif;color:black">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif;color:black">
<a href="mailto:j1@jimenezshaw.com" title="j1@jimenezshaw.com" target="_blank">Javier Jimenez Shaw</a>
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:whitesmoke"><b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif;color:black">Sent:</span></b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif;color:black"> Saturday, April 17, 2021 2:44 PM<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:whitesmoke"><b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif;color:black">To:</span></b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif;color:black">
<a href="mailto:PROJ@lists.osgeo.org" title="PROJ@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">
proj</a> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="background:whitesmoke"><b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif;color:black">Subject:</span></b><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Tahoma,sans-serif;color:black"> [PROJ] World UTM in a proper datum<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Hi <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Maybe there is a better place to talk about this, but I do not know which one. I hope somebody from EPSG is reading this, and may give me a clue.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">We have talked many times about the lack of accuracy of WGS84 (EPSG:4326), the datum ensemble, etc.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">The problem is that I miss an accurate equivalent of the projected family "WGS84 / UTM zone XXY"(EPSG:326XX and EPSG327XX) for XX between 1 and 60 and Y is N or S. It would be nice something similar
(a worldwide projected CRSs on UTM), but over a proper accurate and well defined geographic CRS (ITRF2014, WGS84(G1762), etc).<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Do you know if there is any plan? Or do they exist and I was not able to find them?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">Thanks.<br clear="all">
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">.___ ._ ..._ .. . ._. .___ .. __ . _. . __.. ... .... ._ .__<br>
Entre dos pensamientos racionales <br>
hay infinitos pensamientos irracionales.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">
<hr size="2" width="100%" align="center">
</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;color:black">_______________________________________________<br>
PROJ mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:PROJ@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">PROJ@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/proj" target="_blank">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/proj</a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<font size="2">Disclaimer:<br>
De inhoud van dit bericht is uitsluitend bestemd voor geadresseerde.<br>
Gebruik van de inhoud van dit bericht door anderen zonder toestemming van het Kadaster<br>
is onrechtmatig. Mocht dit bericht ten onrechte bij u terecht komen, dan verzoeken wij u<br>
dit direct te melden aan de verzender en het bericht te vernietigen.<br>
Aan de inhoud van dit bericht kunnen geen rechten worden ontleend.<br>
<br>
Disclaimer:<br>
The content of this message is meant to be received by the addressee only.<br>
Use of the content of this message by anyone other than the addressee without the consent<br>
of the Kadaster is unlawful. If you have received this message, but are not the addressee,<br>
please contact the sender immediately and destroy the message.<br>
No rights can be derived from the content of this message.<br>
</font>
</div>
</blockquote></div>